with feminist writers on that election on donald trump. @8:30 p.m. we sit down with michael shermer to talk about his book "skeptic" egg selection of his columns gone back to 2001 on afterwards at 9:00 p.m., former fox news host gretchen carlson discusses sexual harassment in the workplace with sally quinn of the "washington post" and at 10:00 p.m. doug stanton looks at the vietnam war's offensive through the eyes of 40 minute the u.s. army's echo company. we wrap up our primetime programmingat 11:15 p.m. eastern with hillary clinton. she sits down to talk about the 2016 presidential campaign and election. that happens tonight on c-span twos book tv. >> secretary clinton in the book, what happened-- "what happened". let's begin election night and you're at the first warning sign was north carolina.

walk us through that evening? guest: yes, well it was actually florida north carolina coming and pretty quick succession. we always knew north carolina would be hard for many reasons, but we thought we had a good lead going into election day because of early voting in florida, so when those number started coming in, that was quite surprising, disappointing. it wasn't the end, by any means, because they were a number of ways we saw week would get to 270 electoral votes, but it was a very very long night and then around midnight when michigan and wisconsin and pennsylvania came in, we knew we weren't going to be successful. host: what was going through your mind? guest: well, at first i was worried, but not alarmed with early returns because again, as i said our numbers looked very good in pennsylvania, michigan, wisconsin as did everyone else

as we had consultant, but as the evening went on and we were getting not only the broadcast numbers, but reaching out to people working with us in those states, it had some surprising outcomes that we were following closely and concerned about, so want to enter my mind was there was nothing a could do right now i laid down, shut my eyes for a while because i wanted to collect myself. i had not prepared a concession speech or guy thought i was going to win, and then when the news came in i would say around midnight's i had to do some very hard painful thinking. obviously, there were questions we had and i raised some of the questions in the book about what was really going on, but as of that moment i had to call donald trump who seemed to be pretty surprised about the outcome and there has been reporting since that suggest he was. called president obama

and started talking about a concession speech that i decided i would deliver the next morning. host: you write you pick of the phone, donald, it's hillary and then what happened? guest: well, basically i said congratulations. looks like he will be our next president's. i wish you well and if there's any way i can help you i hope you call on me. it was shorts. it was very much just think you and thanks for calling in many human out to addresses crowd. host: in your concession speech the next date is of the following: we oh him an open mind and a chance to lead. guest: yes, and i really believe that. host: nine and a half months into his presidency, how is he doing? guest: not well and it's sad to. i take no pleasure in any of this. i knew the kind of campaign he ran, which i found deeply disturbing. i said many times i didn't think he had the experience or temperaments to qualify

him to be president. but, people say and do things and campaigns all the time. you cover this from start to finish and so i was hoping that we would see a donald trump emerge who understood the gravity of the position he was about to assume. i think it has not worked out the way i would have wanted for our country. instead, i believe we are still seeing starting on inauguration day and a lot of the same irresponsible impulsive behavior that is ascending a lot of wrong signals here at home and around the world. host: in your book you talk about the white house. you were there for eight years and john adams wrote to his wife and in parties" may not but honest and wise men ever fool under this roof. guest: yes, i did. host: would you put trump in that category? guest: not yet, no, i wouldn't

and part of the reason i put that in is because i would go down sometimes at night and walked the first floor of the white house and think about the history that had happened there, ending up before the fireplace without engraved at the top of it. steve, if i had lost to one of a number of other republicans who were seeking the nomination i would of course been disappointed and would not have agreed with them on many of the policies they were going to pursue, but i don't think i would've had the doubt and worries i have -- in fact, i'm sure of it with respect to president trump and his behavior and i just came back from a trip to england and wales and korea and there's just a great uncertainty out there like what does he mean when he treats, what are his real objectives, what is he trying to achieve on behalf of america and the world because he has

created so much confusion in the minds of so many. host: have you talked to the president says he took office? guest: no, i have not other than after the inauguration as i write the first chapter, don't-- bill and i went as a former president and first lady. we thought it was our duty to do that and it was hard because his speech was not at all what i had hoped for. i thought it would be a perfect opportunity for him to reach out and embrace all americans who supported him and those who did not, which is what i intended to do if i had been in that position. of course, we heard him talking about carnage and it was a dark and divisive rhetoric that we got in that moment. afterwords, went to the lunch and i shook his hand and said hello, wished him well, but that is the last time i have seen him. host: if you could sit down with him and give him some advice would you tell him? guest: i would tell him to just take a deep breath, slowdown, be

willing to listen to people who may not necessarily already agree with you. have an open mind about some of these tough decisions. be more open to the facts and evidence about the consequences of your policies. i would certainly has a former secretary of state talk to him about korea and iran. i would talk to him about the threat russia poses to europe and to our internal well-being because of the continuing attacks that we know vladimir putin is undertaking against our own unity at home. i would do my best to lay out a case and i would say mr. president, you have the opportunity to change course. look, i know we are all fully formed adults and we get into this office, but that does not mean we stop learning circuits like you love to play golf as does my husband has to former presidents like barack obama. i bet you are not adverse to having some

pro- give you some tips about how to be an even better golfer. this job is so demanding and you have to have a more regular schedule. you have to have a open mind so you can take in information. yet to listen to people and, please, get more people who know things into your government, the state department is missing so many top positions and these are people who speak the liquid jetting of the culture and you're dealing with north korea, iran, russia, anywhere else and there are people who have experience to let-- help you be the best president. i would try and i know others have dried. i talk to people who have been in the oval office trying to help him, trying to provide support. it might last 24, 48 hours and that he feels compelled to respond-- return to the attack mode, insult mode especially those who disagree with him. using a fight with senator corker, he's in

a fight with congresswoman wilson, a fight with all of these people all the time and it takes a lot of energy and you need to be focus on solving problem, not settling scores. host: is unify with his accuracy guest: when it is saddest week that i've been aware of was when rex tillerson was doing his job to try to get a site that somatic track, which is what we must do bringing the chinese into the forefront as well as japan, south korea and others and he was doing his job in beijing and basically the president tweets forget about it. there's only one way to go. if you are the secretary of state, you have got to be perceived as speaking for the president and the for the nation and that's what rex tillerson thought he was doing in his president in front of the world basically humiliated him. host: how do you solve the north korea problem?

guest: i was in north korea and asked to come speak about that another matter spirit there's no easy solution i'm well aware that. i follow this close report 25 years both in the-- my husband was there and also as secretary state. here is what i know, the chinese have to be persuaded and i think that they are closer to being persuaded that may have been in the past, that the behavior of kim jong-un is it dangerous to them and dangerous to peace and prosperity in the region. the chinese have always taken the view that they can balance off north and south korea and by doing so kind of keep the us on a backlit. now with the behavior of kim jong-un and frankly the very rude attitude he's taken towards much of the chinese leadership and his pursuant of intercontinental ballistic missiles with nuclear warhead the chinese now have a huge

state in helping to rate-- rain him in and enforce sanctions that have been tightened at the un in getting korea, by working through the pla, people's liberation army and the military in north korea to get them to the negotiating table and there is no substitute for just sitting there day after day, you know i started negotiations with iran and i was the one who sent out the fuel or send first people to meet with the iranians to see if something was possible. it took years. i know what happened in irish peace process and it took years. you have got to have a strategic patience and some people dismiss that, but in fact in a world where unless you want to cause nuclear warfare, which i hope no one wants, you will have to, but at the same time that you are working patiently to get everyone to the table and convince china to play a more active role

you need to say there will be consequences if you send a missile over our allies that we are sworn to protect, japan and south korea for our territory like warm or you begin testing missiles that could reach hawaii but the west coast of our country there will be severe consequences, make no mistake. but, you don't say that in a tweet. you don't say that in a insult calling him rocket man and all of that. that only plays into his hands. you do it in a calm very clear way that delivers the message and of course, we have to continue to defend our allies, which is why we are putting missile defense and south korea. the chinese don't like that. in fact, i was asked about that insole, because they are in response boycotting certain korean businesses to the answer is don't boycott people trying to protect themselves from what could happen to them. contain and deter the north from do anything.

host: when senator corker made reference to world war iii luxury reaction? guest: i have worked with bob corker and he's a very sober guy , very conservative, but very good person to work with. i worked with him as a secretary state on what was called the new start treaty to lower nuclear weapons in russia and the us. so, he does his homework he studies things and comes to thoughtful conclusions. what he said is we could have a war by total miscalculation. when you use twitter to communicate, when you're insulting instead of doing the hard slow work of actually putting together some kind of diplomatic response someone can miscalculate and that someone is certainly-- could be kim jong-un. he has already flown to missiles over japan that we know of and threaten qualm. he's threatened the us. if he believes that there's no appetite in this administration at

least by the president to deal with some of these bigger issues, who knows what he might do. he might not even intend the consequences, but unfortunately they would flow. host: at what point did you say i'm going to write about this campaign? guest: steve, had no intention of doing it after the election. i was just spent and i was devastated and somewhat in a state of shock because i couldn't figure out what had happened. host: let me stop you there. you come back after your concession speech walk us through that afternoon. guest: well, i gave the concession speech and there were a lot of friends and supporters there, obviously lots of hugs and tears. finally, bill and i leave and get in the back seat of our car and i just felt like every ounce of adrenaline was draining out. i was so exhausted and we just basically sat there. we got home and on came

the sweats and the fleece and just trying to catch up on sleep and play with our dogs and then we started the next day in a walk for the woods-- for a walk in the woods which we like to do, but i was just in a state of total confusion. i didn't know and i relayed in the book, i talk about what it felt like, you know. the walks in the woods, yoga, clean my closets, my chair-- share of chardonnay, all of that, but the nicene analyses or commentary about the election and i just thought people were missing a lot of what i thought was critical to the outcome. we were just understanding what the russians had gone and after the election the obama administration actually came out with even more information about what the russians had been up to, began sanctions on certain

russian individuals and institutions for their interference in the election, but it took weeks and in fact months. we are still learning about what the russians were up to and how effective they were or could they are masters at propaganda trick this wasn't their first rodeo. they knew how to influence voters picked a used social media. the used bots and trolls and so-called fake news. they were rolling it all out and of course, the question that is investigated is, were they coordinating with the trump campaign. we will find the answer to that, but i thought it was important that people begin to pay attention to what the russians did because it's an ongoing threat. it's not going away. we finally learned that they had intruded into election systems and may be as many as 30 or more states. what is that mean? had we protect ourselves from a foreign adversary? there was that piece of it, which was not getting the coverage i thought and as you

remember there was a big debate that started after the election, was a economic anxiety or cultural anxiety and i thought that was importance. of course there was it-- economic anxiety, but it was also a very clear theme in trump campaign appealing to anti- immigrants, race to anti- islamic attitudes, sexism, on and on, so then slowly information started coming out, very well respected independent third parties looking at a lot of data. one of the things that struck me was that an exit polls with people who said the economy was minimal and issue, i won those people and maybe despite the best efforts to prevent my message from getting across people heard me talking about jobs and income inequality which i talked about endlessly. that was important for us to explore and then voter suppression. every day that goes by we are getting more

information to: early first data wisconsin where there is so much evidence of a voter suppression there have been excellent studies that i think are compelling and end it-- as this went on and as i said to myself what happened i thought i want to know what happened in the only way i could figure out how to do was to immerse myself in all of the information as it was becoming available to sort it out, to try to get to the evidence as best i could and as i thought about that, i thought maybe there is a book of their nfl like i owed-- i felt like i owed an explanation to my supporters and to myself into history. i wanted it to be personal, political and historical. host: as you know sean hannity on his program has been critical of their uranium one deal with the president saying with regard to russia that is the real story in this.

what would you say to those critics? guest: it's the same baloney they had been peddling for years and there have been no credible evidence by anyone. it's been the bonked repeatedly and will be continue to be debunked. i have to give them credit. trump and his allies including fox news are really experts at destruction version, so the closer that investigation about real or russian ties between trump associates and real russians as we heard jeff sessions finally admit to in his testimony the other day, the more they want to just throw mud on the wall and on their favorite target, me and president obama are the ones they always like to put into the crosshairs, so yes, i'm not surprised but i think the real story is how nervous they are about these continuing investigation. host: in the book you read the following: i blame myself, my worst fears about my limitations as a candidate had come true. so, what were those limitations?

guest: i try to go through the thought process that led to my finally deciding to run and number one, i was worried that it's a hard historical trend over-- to overcome to try to succeed a two-term president of euro party. my husband in the very beginning and the chapter i write about this in the process i went through says you could lose because it's a hard historical burden to carry. i worried that i would not be as effective in taking my random leadership, which every time i'm in office people give me high marks for, but translating into a campaign and i write about this that there seems to be a kind of mismatch between what i consider the seriousness of the responsibility of laying out for the american people what you would do as president's. and the performance of

running for president. donald trump was our first reality tv candidate. i for better or worse was the candidate of reality and i tried to match that the best i could, but i wasn't going to go after immigrants. i wasn't going to revert to racism and homophobia and anti- muslim talk. i wasn't going to do that and i saw in the primary campaign how effective trump was in insulting, attacking and dismissing the 16, 17 people he was running against many of whom had one tough elections with experience, had policies they wanted to put forth and that's when i realize this is a different kind of campaign and it's a campaign riddell of reality tv, which is what he had been involved in four years and how do i match that. how do i try to deal with that?

then, there was a whole other question of sexism and misogyny in the double standards. i knew it was alive and well. i thought that i could really get through it and demonstrate that i was not only up for the job, but the best qualified for the job, but running against an unapologetic sexual assault or who was just after women starting with carly fiorina and going on to people in that media, going on to me made it really hard because on the one hand as i write about the second debate with him leering and lurking and it just trying to assert his dominance over me on the stage, if you turn the sound off he looks like the big alpha male and he is there and i'm ready to take on all

comers and what he is saying makes no sense or actual basis to it. it betrays an impulsivity that is not a good quality in a presidents, but it's entertaining and i thought that it was a big challenge and although, i think i was on the way to winning until the james comey later-- letter, i knew we had to try do blunt the appeal of that kind of entertainment. host: you praise your campaign staff, but do you think your staff let hillary be hillary in 2016? guest: look, here's what i believe, i think my staff who were a tremendous combination of people who had helped elect barack obama in 2008 and 2012 and had been with me 2008 who came from other experiences together a phenomenal campaign apparatus, but i believe we were playing on the field of what presidential elections had been

like and so when you think about what we were trying to do, we were trying to be kind of obama 3.0, learn the lessons of his first two races, be prepared with our digital and data analytics operation to target voters and so we were operating in the arena that we thought was the right arena, but proportionally the trump campaign and the press were operating this new reality tv arena. the press could not get enough of his entertainment and so i have never imagined we would pass national coverage of an empty podium. they were all just waiting to see what would happen at they admitted that it was great for profits. people tuned in like a reality tv show you don't know what will happen next and the guy was the next third at-bat, so i don't think the press held him accountable, particularly the way he

should have been held accountable kick i think they dismissed and i would point out in the book overall in 2016 we got 32 minutes of coverage the whole year for policies compared to over 200 and 2008 and like 174 in 2012, so i don't blame voters for not knowing. the only thing they knew about me is that i had been around and i had an e-mail controversy, which as i spent a whole chapter explaining was never the big deal that it was made out to be and i took responsible before it from the beginning. host: you said in the beginning that the media needs to do its old soul-searching. guest: yes, i do and one of the things about c-span and i'm not just flattering you, but you cover everything and let people draw their own conclusions and i understand the pressure that the press is under, both print and broadcast and certainly online. they have got to get ad dollars or they have got

to get eyeballs or clicks, whatever they are looking for and i get that, but you know our presidential election is a big deal and now, we see what happens when someone is not infected and people say well we talked about the hollywood access tapes. yeah, and how much continuing coverage did you get to the more than 12 women that followed up with personal stories? not much, i mean, it was always on to something new and i think the trumpet campaign did a good job in changing the subject all the time and so they had a dark divisive convention with all kinds of claims like only i can fix it and lock her up and all of that stuff they did. we had, i thought, a very positive upbeat, optimistic convention and it's been my experience being in and around presidential politics that optimism usually one. optimism is what americans were looking for and the messages then that we were trying

to convey coming out of our convention with cain as my ramie and as i read in the book we went on a bus tour. we went to hard-hit industrial places in pennsylvania and ohio and talked about what we were going to do. i thought we had a realistic chance of getting these things done even in a divided congress and trump continued to attack the family over the loss of captain kahn. the press covered that. they didn't what tim and i were telling steelworkers or ironworkers or other people who we were visiting, so i really have to give them credit for understanding how to capture and hold television and the attention that one gets and then if you combine that with the help they were getting from the russians, which had two objectives, to lift up him and to tear me down.

in order to tear me down they had to lie about me, which i did persistently. they had to convince people who otherwise would have voted for me not to because they came up with wild exaggerated fables about me or did that was going underground in a very effective way. if i saw me and my campaign is that i don't think we understood as well as we should and now i hope candidates in the future will, the combined impact of the effect of john podesta's e-mails and the release of them by wikileaks, which remember happened within an hour of the hollywood access tapes being released. you could not have a better example of some kind of communication if not coordination. dropped them now. now is when we need them , so wikileaks became a dominant theme, stuff totally made up, steve cook outrageous

stuff accusing me and podesta of running a child trafficking ring in a pizzeria in washington, total non- sensible lies, but they delivered it. it went from russian tv or sputnik tv to fox or breitbart or infoworld-- whirls are going to face the pages, twitter and we now know that. we didn't know it at the time. host: from your sampling the direction of all of this in russia came from who? guest: well, we know from the intelligence that's been gathered that vladimir putin directed it. he said we are going after her. i don't want her to be president. if she makes it anyway what her to be damaged. i sit up to him when i was secretary of state pick that was my job as the representative of this great country of ours and the behavior the russians were engaged in in syria and ukraine and the phony elections they were running in russia, i spoke out about that. that those with the territory, but vladimir putin took it personally

and he also is a pretty clear exhibit of the sexism in motion, so whatever prior experiences or connections he and/or the people around him had with the trump family were-- we are only now understanding, but he wanted to hurt me and the order went out and they are really good at this. they are good at compromising people by making up stuff. they are good at active measures, putting out lies, warning people and it came from the kremlin and it was executed through most likely their intelligence services and proxies like wikileaks, which is basically become a proxy of the russian government. host: in your previous book "hard choices" you write about vladimir putin and how best to understand him, his family, his

mother. what was the story? guest: i was a stunned to hear this story from vladimir putin himself and this was in early september, 2012. i was attending an international conference because president obama was in the midst of reelection, so i was representing the us. we were far far east of russia, closest to alaska and he would not meet with me at first because he knew what i was going to say about syria, that they had to work with us as i had been saying repeatedly for months to end the massacres, try to prevent the consolidation of terrorist groups and everything else we were concerned about. he would not meet with me and right before the dinner we had a short 15 minute sitdown in which he was his usual dismissive itself, not

interested, not responsive and i had seen it before. i was used to it and i would come to any encounter with him with the question to ask that might get him interested in. i knew i was going to sit next to him at the dinner because protocol required at the representative of the united states be on one side of him as we hosted the prior conference on the aipac conference in the next toes on the other side, so i say mr. president, i finally had a chance to goat to the war memorial in st. petersburg and it's astonishing in its power and incredible stories of those who held the line against the nazis and all of those months, so then he said i have a story to tell you and he tells me this remarkable story about how his father was on the front lines during the siege and he got some time off to go home for just a

few hours, maybe spend the nights. he's walking down the street where their apartment building is and he sees as was common in stalingrad at that time, he sees a pile of bodies. he looks at the body and he looks at the bottom of the pile and he sees a shoe any foot and he recognizes his wife. the body collectors are loading the bodies into carts to take them away to try to prevent plague and disease. so, vladimir putin's father runs up and says that my wife, that's my wife, you can't take my wife and gets into a confrontation and finally the body collectors had you want you dead wife, take your dead wife so he pulls the body out of the pile and when he has her he realizes she's alive and he takes her up to the apartments and nurses her back to health. of the war ends, a few years later vladimir putin is born.

i had studied a lot about vladimir putin's live as best you can because there isn't much information. i had never heard that story. i thought it told us a lot about his mindset and his feelings about what russia must be in order to protect itself, defend its interests. i got back to the room i was staying in and called our ambassador and other experts in russia and i tell him this story and said have you ever heard this. none of them had heard it and i put it in the book and the russians never contradicted it, so to this day they have never confirmed it, but they have never contradicted it, so i assume it is true and i thought it was an important insight into how this man thinks and of course, now, we know that he is it determined to reassert russian greatness and along with that his own and he is also determined to make and a mormon-- an enormous amount of money , hundreds and hundreds of millions, maybe even a billion or two out of his

connections so he has a piece of all the action, that he is determined to disrupt the european union, disrupt nato and disrupt us and now, we know a lot of what he was doing was not just aimed at me, it was to so discourse and discord in america. fascinating person, not to be underestimated, but not to be pandered to either, as i say in what happens he is fond of a quote-- a rush", take a steel bayonet and push a few reach of mush keep pushing, if you read to bone poll out. you got a so some backbone here and i think what trump is doing is tried to have it both ways or quark is ample, congress passed more sanctions on russia in part because of what we are learning about how much russia interfered in our election.

so, trump was forced to sign them. he's not implementing them. of they have not yet been rolled out. no one else has been sanctioned. so, he's trying to get into the congress whom he needs for his other crazy ideas like this horrible tax cut he's pushing and too weak link at putin. i may not have given you everything but i'm trying to hold the line on everything that's important to you. is acting like his puppet and the fact are not ruling out sanctions is more evident. host: where do you think this investigation will and? guest: i don't know. i think-- i have been somewhat pleasantly surprised that the congress particularly in the senate, senate intelligence committee particularly is really digging deep into russian interference on social media. of they are calling in facebook and twitter and google and others in demeaning answers and they should. we all need to know and the companies need to do

a better job in protecting our country going forward and they also need to be really transparent and tell us everything that happened. show us every ad. we need to know what we are up against because the american people have to develop defenses to this foreign interference. guest: that i think as i say is promising to get to the bottom of a lot of whites has gone on particularly with the russians. i think that robert moeller investigation is obviously looking at whatever communications, coordinations, connections there was between people associated with trump and his campaign and with the russians and what the reasons for it might've been or what they have done and i'm not going to hazard any kind of potential conclusion. they had to go where the evidence leads them. host: you have written how me books? guest: well, i have written now for big ones. i wrote "it takes a village", "living

history" hard choices" and then "what happened" and two other books that have been published. letters to our cat and dog when we were in the white house and an entertaining book about the white house. host: do you have another booking you down the road? guest: i probably do. this book was particularly important and very cathartic to guy didn't imagine i could get it done, but once i got going i felt like i was propelled forward with a lot of energy and i have really been very gratified by the response, i mean, people have said i didn't know and i wasn't sure what to expect and they find it as i say both personal and political and so people interested in personal like how much time do you have to spend getting your hair and makeup done as a woman running for office or as the political like what are we going to do about motor suppression, i think there is something for nearly every reader and it's been exciting

going around talking about it and having a chance to answer questions. host: there are a couple stories to ask you about. matt lauer and the commander-in-chief war and you wrote quote i was almost physically sick. i watched matt lauer soft-pedal the donald trump interview. explain. guest: i was sick and matt knows this. i've been on the today show already and he's aware of how i feel about it. being commander-in-chief is the most awesome responsibility, sending young men and women to war potentially using the most lethal of weapons, so if we were going to have a forum on being commander-in-chief i expected to get tough questions about iran, north korea, russia, about nuclear proliferation and terrorism, whatever. instead, more than half of my 30 minutes was about e-mails, something he had already asked me about in a prior interview in april after the james comey investigation closed and

like with other parts of the book i try to take the reader behind the scenes i was like to sit there with so much to say about how to protect and defend our country, which is part of the oats and not to get a chance to do that because i'm being asked things that have no real long-term effect and what's not going to be what the next president with based. i said i started their right-- i was thinking to myself i started the iran negotiations and i was in the situation room on osama bin laden associated cease-fire and went through some of the things i had done personally and donald ciampa not done anything. he lied about his support for the iraq war , said he was against it when we had them on tape saying he was for its. there was so much to question and i was really disappointed. i was disappointed because it wasn't up to match or nbc standards and when trump came on it was a bunch of softballs and so any

viewer who wants to know what the difference between these two people when it comes to war and peace would not have gotten anything out of it. host: you also write about the debates. what was your tactic in preparing for the debates? guest: i prepared, number one. i knew how my husband, how president obama, how other democratic nominees have prepared and i thought it was the right thing to be as prepared as possible. here's what i believe, steve. i thought there's going to be a moment of reckoning in this campaign. he's been the reality tv candidate, but as we get into the debates in the public in the press have to make this awesome decision about who to vote for there will be a moment of reckoning. i've seen in the past. didn't come, so yeah, i was prepared. in the first debate trump actually made fun of me for being prepared and i said yeah, i prepared to be president and then he gets into this job and what is he say, it's a lot harder

than i thought. yeah, it's really hard and preparation matters. so, i was adjudged to have one those three debates, but i don't think it really was the kind of moments that i had hoped for in the debate where a moderator really pin him down and basically said what are you talking about. you keep saying you will have mexico pay for the wall at what you talking about, explain that and show the people that basically had nothing to say. vegan happened, so i prepared and i felt good about my performance in the debates. i thought it was weird in the second debate as i write about and in the third debate as more information was coming out about russia's role in night accused him of being his puppet and he did know how to respond, but because the fbi never confirmed there was an open

investigation about the trumpet campaign relationship with russia i'm sure a lot of viewers thought what is she talked about black americans puppet, i mean, i knew based on digging deep into all of the information we could get our hands odd-- on two public sources that the russians were knee-deep in our elections, but much to my total amazement james comey was willing to make a phony charge against me on october 28, and it never tell our country there was a serious open counterintelligence investigation of trump and his campaign. host: would you have kept james comey if elected? guest: i do want to answer hypotheticals. isn't it ironic as i write in the book in the chapter on e-mails where i don't use my words i use other people's words and i use the words of the current deputy attorney general basically pointed out how many worlds he broke

, how he defied protocol and interfered with the election when he should have. those were serious matters. i think you can criticize him for that, which i do strongly as you know, but i think you can still say he was fired because he is going to conduct an investigation that russia. so you have to keep those two thoughts in mind. ..

>> >> again wish to be taxing the wealthy not giving them the biggest tax cut in the history which is what trump wants to do so there were big and important challenges but i was going into this to be optimistic about america's future because diversity is a great plus. and i think there is a lot we could have done to lift that up to move forward but now looking at the damage that has been done to the institution and rule of law stick because talk about the cruelty of american politics so your reaction and?. >> i thought it was an

important speech and i appreciated president bush to deliver that had he covered a lot of ground talking how white supremacy is a blasphemy to the american creed and the importance of listening to each other i didn't always agree with him but i never doubted his patriotism or that he didn't work car door i was never concerned about what he would do i was in the oval office with him two days after 9/11 after looking at what he had to face. clear appreciate him coming out to make a thoughtful critique of where american politics is right now. leer of the wrong path.

for us to force people to be on opposite sides of critical issues never talk compromise with the ongoing assault with these ridiculous claims they are making about the tax cost we have been down this road before but we should get back to evidence based policy making to have a very robust debate alien looking per common ground they tried to fly back to keep the affordable care act governing fire people who need the help. it is in both parties have much more with the republican party. of religious doodad extent and never thought possible because of citizens united a and the determination of

those billionaires to destroy a government to make themselves richer and richer it is bad for americans and also the policies they are pursuing. >> to say yes?. >> i don't know. i only see what is in public and i have no access to the fights. >> some of the critics say hillary clinton is from the shrunken in a beaded richard nixon to take responsibility and blame everybody else but a lottery pay what you said. [laughter] simic there are many more positive reviews by a longshot so i take

responsibility and i blame myself. i was the candidate. renee was all about it. so to talk about those continuing challenges from misogyny. and that is one of the reasons that i lost because and then to stop those republicans from that shrinking electorate. with that of unprecedented intervention. so-so of my critics don't like what i say and i understand that but i've been dave follow those shiny objects they after day with the research that shows to have a big half of trump and reality tv tactics.

now they say we should have done a better job. find. do a better job next time but don't blame the messenger. first hand personal political historical view of 2016. and to have even more problems going forward stick your vice to the nomination in 2020?. >> i'm begging people to vote 27 d new jersey and virginia and i will do everything they can so if you are and not do it the trump presidency down just completed a show about march sauternes now than devote. so to protect that sanctity

doobie prevented by those of russian techniques. >> are you done with politics?. >> i am does being a candidate. i care deeply about the country. i did not put myself out there fighting not believe i could contribute or be a good president but i don't want to see us go back words. with the rule of law or the free press. over all of my objections. but you would never catch me to say take those licenses. so right in the middle of the debate. >> some of walk us through the process. >> bba thought there was a book i talked with my publisher to give day go

ahead they suggested other things in my response is this is what i think about every day this is what i want to write about. so i had some great young people who worked with v literally my turd in the first draft of the manuscript and the publisher said it is really good. of you can get it done by the end of june it can go out early september. i said you are killing me. i felt like i was back in college with all mitres and got it done by the end of june with correction in early july. with the guest house with

lots of long nights and i even did the audio and simon and schuster got an out by september 12. ion doing a lot of catch-up reading. and then netted say retrospective. >> we just cut the award but i now have 4 feet of books that they were getting me that we will read and virgil -- and enjoy. >> is our home hear we love

it.